BOOK REVIEW - Plato's ''Apology'' and ''Crito''
Alright, let's make things clear from the get-go: I am NOT an intellectual. I have next to no formal education in philosophy. I do, however, enjoy reading the sort of literature that challenges my understanding of things and my ability to think critically (in the rare occasion that I can do such type of thinking).
That being said, I thought the best way to kick off my series of book reviews is by addressing two major Socratic dialogues I just finished reading: the Apology of Socrates and Crito, as the latter follows the former.
Again, I'm not a scholar nor anything of the sort. Learned men and students of philosophy would perhaps focus on some underlying concept pertaining to the study of philosophy - like the allusions made to the Socratic paradox (i.e. "I know that I know nothing") throughout the Apology - yet I am more concerned about the dialogues' narrative and the lessons we can draw from it.
Now, you've probably heard of Socrates as this massive Greek philosopher whose legacy and influence lasts to this very day. That's all fine and well. What you may not be aware of is the fact that Socrates was tried and executed by the people of Athens - his hometown. The Apology depicts Socrates' statements throughout his trial, while Crito tells of the conversation between Socrates and the eponymous Crito after the philosopher was sentenced to death.
In the Apology, Socrates stands in trial accused of disregarding the gods in favor of foreign ideas and of corrupting the youth of Athens. Accusing Socrates were Meletus, Anytus and Lycon, each representing a group of people who felt offended by the philosopher; however, only Meletus speaks during Socrates' defense. In his self-defense speech (Socrates would not have any other person speak on his behalf), Socrates claims his accusers are trying to destroy his credibility with lies and calumny. He goes on to explain how he earned the enmity of the Athenian statesmen, poets and craftsmen represented by his accusers, citing their pride and arrogance as the cause of their opposition. In this speech Socrates confronts Meletus, effectively proving his accusations are unfounded. He also tells of his mission to exhort the people of Athens to embrace virtue; of how he preferred to address people individually for the sake of his life; and of how his example stood above reproach.
However eloquent his defense may be, Socrates is still sentenced to death, though he claims such outcome was to be expected. He states that he deserved not to be convicted, but to be rewarded for his service to the city of Athens. Nevertheless, Socrates acquiesces to the punishment, refusing to give his accusers the satisfaction of seeing him pleading for mercy.
And if the Apology was not dramatic enough, Crito is nothing short of heart-wrenching. Here we have Crito, a good friend of Socrates, come to his cell and beg the philosopher to escape his doom. With genuine kindness and understanding, Socrates rebukes his friend, convincing him that injustice must never be repaid with injustice, and that it is for the best that he, Socrates, accepts the fate set for him.
Perhaps what's most fascinating - and unfortunate - about these dialogues is how actual they seem to be. Right now, nearly twenty-five centuries later, false accusations and character assassination are still very real and very damaging. Ideas are being stifled; injustices are being committed. How are we, individuals with minds of their own who can think for themselves, supposed to face these circumstances? Our best option - perhaps our only option - is to follow Socrates' example, challenging the preconceived notions of our times with sincerity, respect, and eagerness to learn from others, always being careful to examine ourselves in the process.
Again, not a philosopher. This is just my two cents, and I hope it resonates with you somehow.
That being said, I thought the best way to kick off my series of book reviews is by addressing two major Socratic dialogues I just finished reading: the Apology of Socrates and Crito, as the latter follows the former.
Again, I'm not a scholar nor anything of the sort. Learned men and students of philosophy would perhaps focus on some underlying concept pertaining to the study of philosophy - like the allusions made to the Socratic paradox (i.e. "I know that I know nothing") throughout the Apology - yet I am more concerned about the dialogues' narrative and the lessons we can draw from it.
Now, you've probably heard of Socrates as this massive Greek philosopher whose legacy and influence lasts to this very day. That's all fine and well. What you may not be aware of is the fact that Socrates was tried and executed by the people of Athens - his hometown. The Apology depicts Socrates' statements throughout his trial, while Crito tells of the conversation between Socrates and the eponymous Crito after the philosopher was sentenced to death.
In the Apology, Socrates stands in trial accused of disregarding the gods in favor of foreign ideas and of corrupting the youth of Athens. Accusing Socrates were Meletus, Anytus and Lycon, each representing a group of people who felt offended by the philosopher; however, only Meletus speaks during Socrates' defense. In his self-defense speech (Socrates would not have any other person speak on his behalf), Socrates claims his accusers are trying to destroy his credibility with lies and calumny. He goes on to explain how he earned the enmity of the Athenian statesmen, poets and craftsmen represented by his accusers, citing their pride and arrogance as the cause of their opposition. In this speech Socrates confronts Meletus, effectively proving his accusations are unfounded. He also tells of his mission to exhort the people of Athens to embrace virtue; of how he preferred to address people individually for the sake of his life; and of how his example stood above reproach.
However eloquent his defense may be, Socrates is still sentenced to death, though he claims such outcome was to be expected. He states that he deserved not to be convicted, but to be rewarded for his service to the city of Athens. Nevertheless, Socrates acquiesces to the punishment, refusing to give his accusers the satisfaction of seeing him pleading for mercy.
And if the Apology was not dramatic enough, Crito is nothing short of heart-wrenching. Here we have Crito, a good friend of Socrates, come to his cell and beg the philosopher to escape his doom. With genuine kindness and understanding, Socrates rebukes his friend, convincing him that injustice must never be repaid with injustice, and that it is for the best that he, Socrates, accepts the fate set for him.
Perhaps what's most fascinating - and unfortunate - about these dialogues is how actual they seem to be. Right now, nearly twenty-five centuries later, false accusations and character assassination are still very real and very damaging. Ideas are being stifled; injustices are being committed. How are we, individuals with minds of their own who can think for themselves, supposed to face these circumstances? Our best option - perhaps our only option - is to follow Socrates' example, challenging the preconceived notions of our times with sincerity, respect, and eagerness to learn from others, always being careful to examine ourselves in the process.
Again, not a philosopher. This is just my two cents, and I hope it resonates with you somehow.
"Some one will say: And are you not ashamed, Socrates, of a course of life which is likely to bring you to an untimely end? To him I may fairly answer: There you are mistaken: a man who is good for anything ought not to calculate the chance of living or dying; he ought only to consider whether in doing anything he is doing right or wrong—acting the part of a good man or of a bad."
- Apology of Socrates
Comments
Post a Comment